setup_complete_onboarding

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

With no annotations, the description fails to disclose side effects (e.g., irreversible state change) or what happens to ongoing onboarding steps. It mentions returning a summary but does not specify contents or format, leaving agents uncertain about invocation consequences.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Two concise sentences with no wasted words. Front-loaded purpose and outcome.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

The tool is simple (no params), but without annotations or output schema, the description should provide more behavioral context. It barely meets adequacy by stating the action and return type, but lacks details on state changes or dependencies.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

The tool has zero parameters and schema coverage is 100%, so the description adds no parameter-specific meaning. Baseline is 4 for no parameters, and the description does not detract from this.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

The description clearly states the verb 'mark onboarding as complete' and the resource 'onboarding', distinguishing it from other setup_* tools like setup_check_status or setup_configure_lightning. However, it does not explain what specific actions 'complete' entails, leaving minor ambiguity.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

The description provides no guidance on when to use this tool versus siblings, such as prerequisites or ordering relative to other setup tools. There is no mention of when not to use it or alternatives, which is a significant gap given the onboarding context.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.